Namdrol: Buddhist Philosophy and tenet systems is pretty much a dry hump. It does not lead anywhere. In the end it is merely dry intellectualization divorced from personal experience.

It certainly can be 'dry' and 'divorced from personal experience', but it need not be that way. For example, the famous bodhi experience of Je Tsongkhapa came after much pondering on a passage in a Buddhapalita(?) shastra.

This intellectual study can be useful, even essential, when it comes time to teach intellectuals. Then all that mental content can be displayed for their benefit, to keep them attracted to the buddhadharma until a deeper insight is gained.

After all, it seems too goofy to think that Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, Shantideva et al were wasting their and our time.

All that philosophy is about ultimately establishing right view (the opinions of what constitutes right view obviously differ from author to author). Often it is discerning wisdom which counteracts wrong views, challenges incorrect assumptions and enables the mind to rationally reform itself in a positive direction. For example, if you study emptiness on an intellectual level you might come to understand the lack of inherent identity in one's person and melt away the barrier between self and other, thus producing compassion.

It is a means to an end, but then so is meditation and any religious practice.

Nangwa wrote:Both dry humping and Buddhist philosophy can be entertaining and they both can help you get ready for the real thing.But, you eventually have to take your pants off and get down to business.

Need help getting on retreat? Want to support others in practice? Pay the Dana for Dharma forum a visit...

Nangwa wrote:Both dry humping and Buddhist philosophy can be entertaining and they both can help you get ready for the real thing.But, you eventually have to take your pants off and get down to business.

Yeah, also dry humping (like Buddhist philosophy) can save one from nasty diseases. --In the case of humping-- STD's and in the case of Buddhist philosophy the diseases of -wrong views such as Nihilism or Eternalism. Of course, once you've gained some confidence that there's no diseases to be shared, you do have to get down to business!

Contentment is the ultimate wealth;Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha

Using the tools with skills without clinging to the tools. Since I know not much, this is easy.

At the end dry hump, not very useful to keep the boat on our back when we arrive on the grass. Or when we stop clinging to notions subject-object in certainty of nondual nature of appaerances-emptiness, we will no longer need further analysis and conceptual investigation. (Shechen teaching)

Buddhist philosophy isn't philosophy per se - it's not like we're engaging Wittgenstein for example (and he was one of the most useful philosophers). Buddhist philosophy is a description of enlightened view from various perspectives. The different perspectives means that enlightenment can be understood and actualized at different levels. This is intended to be for our realization in this lifetime.

Well said. It's amazing how much time lends the perception of credence to words.

Formula for profundity: Take some deluded speculation, wrap it in hubris, seal it with the seal of "authority", and then hide it away for 1,200 years to be discovered by someone equally or even more deluded so they can start their own school, religion, or [cynicism](in our day) Internet Marketing Company to promote their workshops.[/cynicism]

Wow, in my 18 years of being on the internet and participating in internet Buddhist forums, no one has ever accused me of being a troll. First time for everything I guess.

I guess, having studied in detail tenet systems directly in Tibetan according to the presentations of many masters, and having taught Abhidharma and so on, I just don't share the starry eyed idealism some still maintain for elaborate conceptual infrastuctures.

Will wrote:Namdrol, Be more precise, yet please elaborate. Which major texts, if any, have value in stimulating growth in prajna by the student.

All intellectual studies contribute to defiled prajñā, Buddhist and non-buddhist. But they do not necessarily contribute to undefiled prajñā, the realization of which after all is the point of the Dharma.

So the question should be "which texts contribute to the growth of undefiled prajñā", and the answer to that, sadly, is none of them, should one's study not be balanced with qualified practice.

Will wrote:Namdrol, Be more precise, yet please elaborate. Which major texts, if any, have value in stimulating growth in prajna by the student.

All intellectual studies contribute to defiled prajñā, Buddhist and non-buddhist. But they do not necessarily contribute to undefiled prajñā, the realization of which after all is the point of the Dharma.

So the question should be "which texts contribute to the growth of undefiled prajñā", and the answer to that, sadly, is none of them, should one's study not be balanced with qualified practice.

So you find little or no usefulness in the 3 stage prajñā of Literary, leading to Contemplative leading to Real Mark prajñā?

You argument is conflicted. If "All intellectual studies contribute to defiled prajñā" - and no texts "contribute to the growth of undefiled prajñā" then how can "qualified practice" provide a balance when there is zero weight on the other side?

Further, how can one study non-intellectually - just read, recite & pray devotedly that via osmosis understanding will arise?

Will wrote:So you find little or no usefulness in the 3 stage prajñā of Literary, leading to Contemplative leading to Real Mark prajñā?

Well, your first category is misleading, śruthih means "hearing" and "listening". It does not mean studying books. To whom should we listen? A person qualified to give teachings. The prajñā that results is called "śrutamayī prajñā". Without this vital step, no amount of reading books will awakening the prajñā of the path.

Then we have the prajñā that comes from reflection, cintā-mayī prajñā. In my estimation, reading may constitute a part of this prajñā.

Then finally, you have bhāvanā-mayī prajñā, the prajñā born of practice.

But the exercise by some to become expert in the tenet systems of this or that ancient Abidharma schools, for example, or to become expert in pramāṇa, and so on, completely misses the mark of Dharma practice and realization.

I don't say these things idly. I say these things because I observe many people over the years, westerners as well as so called Geshes, Lamas, Khenpos and so on, who, while being quite expert in myriad ancient opinions about this and that fine point of Buddhist philosophy, nevertheless never succeed in integrating the meaning of the Dharma into their personal life. And so for these people, Dharma remains a religion and a culture, rather than a personal experience.